Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: INAYAT MASIH VS Respondent: STATE
1994 P Cr
1994 P Cr. L J 2347
[Lahore]
Before Sajjad Ahmed Sipra, J
INAYAT MASIH---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No.4644/B of 1993, decided on 20th December, 1993.
Criminal Procedure Code ( V 1898)-----
----S. 497---Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.11---Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.14---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.380---Bail, grant of ---Co-accused had already been allowed bail by lower Court despite having been. Imputed commission of Zina by the abductee in her statement under S.164, Cr.P.C.-- Accused was neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and was in judicial lock-up for over four months---Rule of consistency, therefore, demanded the release of the accused also on bail---Accused was allowed bail in circumstances.
Ch. Muhammad Saleh Nara for Petitioner.
Ali Raza for the State.
Date of hearing: 20th December, 1993.
ORDER
The petitioner is one of the accused in a case registered, vide F.I.R. No.306/93, dated 11-7-1993 under section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance and section 14 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 read with section 380, P.P.C. at Police Station City "B" Division, Sheikhupura.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the State were heard at length in respect of the contentions raised herein. Admittedly, the co-accused of the petitioner David and Manzoor have been allowed bail by the learned lower Court although they were also accused of having committed Zina with the abductee in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. Therefore, there is lot of force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that rule of consistency demands that the present petitioner should be dealt with accordingly. Furthermore, taking into consideration that the petitioner is neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and that he is no longer required by the police and has been in judicial lock-up for over four months, the petitioner is hereby allowed bail in the sum of Rs.30,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C./Duty Magistrate, Sheikhupura.
N.H.Q./I-89/L Bail allowed.